This lens is so freaking amazing. And these shots are incredible. Big up on everyone's shots.

Eventually, I will probably get this lens. But the thing that keeps knocking it down on my list is the fact that it's primarily a "bug lens". Don't get me wrong... I love me some bug shots. And I think it would be tons of fun to go around finding bugs to shoot.

But $1000 is a lot to pay for a lens that isn't good for much beyond shooting bugs.

But $1000 is a lot to pay for a lens that isn't good for much beyond shooting bugs.

I paid $500 for a pristine used copy.

That's fantastic. I just saw your other post about buying and selling on Craigslist.

The 65mm macro should be a great lens to by used, because of its specialty status. A lot of people probably buy it without realizing how challenging it can be. And then, as a buyer, I don't necessarily have to compete with a lot of people in the used market. Most people who buy a bug lens probably aren't tight on cash, and thus buy it new (rather than used). Well, that would be my guess, anyway. ;-)

Actually when you're done it is more than $1k because this lens is not very useful without a flash. It pairs best with the MT-24EX and I recommend anyone interested in the MP-E 65 to budget for the pair.

Personally I find the lens very cheap given what it can do. There really isn't anything out there that is comparable. - You can achieve sharper photos at 5x with a Nikon 10x 10.5 WD objective on top of a 100mm macro, but then you're stuck at 5x. - You can achieve similar (or greater) magnifications using a bellows, but it is extremely difficult to use in the field - Reversing a 50mm may also provide >1x magnification, but again you are stuck at one magnification - Minolta makes a 1-3x macro, but this is 1-5x

Compared with someone paying $13k for "just a bird lens" the MP-E 65 is a bargain.

Actually when you're done it is more than $1k because this lens is not very useful without a flash. It pairs best with the MT-24EX and I recommend anyone interested in the MP-E 65 to budget for the pair.

Absolutely. It's a package deal for sure.

What flashes are people using with this? Is the MT-24EX worth its extra cost over the MR-14EX, when used with this lens?

The MT-24EX is far better than the MR-14EX. IMHO images from the MR-14EX come out a bit flat.

- You can rotate the heads to change the lighting. This is hugely important for insects that are reflective. It is also important for adjusting around obstacles near the critter.- The heads also angle - allowing you to easily move from the 100/2.8 macro to the MP-E 65- The heads may be placed off the front of the lens using macro brackets. This is very useful for lenses such as 180mm macros and for highly reflective things like ice/water drops where you need to dramatically change the angle of the light.- You can control the power differential between the heads - providing more depth in the shot

One thing you need to watch out for with the MT-24EX though is the harshness of the light. I use Sto-fen diffusers to reduce this. There is also a little known hood for the MP-E 65 that helps here.

The MT-24EX is far better than the MR-14EX. IMHO images from the MR-14EX come out a bit flat.

- You can rotate the heads to change the lighting. This is hugely important for insects that are reflective. It is also important for adjusting around obstacles near the critter.- The heads also angle - allowing you to easily move from the 100/2.8 macro to the MP-E 65- The heads may be placed off the front of the lens using macro brackets. This is very useful for lenses such as 180mm macros and for highly reflective things like ice/water drops where you need to dramatically change the angle of the light.- You can control the power differential between the heads - providing more depth in the shot

One thing you need to watch out for with the MT-24EX though is the harshness of the light. I use Sto-fen diffusers to reduce this. There is also a little known hood for the MP-E 65 that helps here.

I just took a closer look at the MT-24EX, and now I appreciate what the key difference is: the directionality of two separate light sources could make for some very dramatic lighting. Whereas the fixed ring style isn't as flexible and sometimes it will work fine and sometimes it won't. I understand now. :-)

Indeed the MT 24EX light is rather harsh. I not only got the Stofens but also stuffed them with cotton balls. Even still on E-TTL on shiny insects the light is harsh. If you do get this setup I would recommend dumping the lens ring that holds the two lights. I found myself bumping into to objects as I gradually got closer.

I think I paid about $40 or $50 about 1.5 years ago. It's well worth the price giving you the utmost flexibility. I also picked up a macro rail from Adorama (house brand) which I mount on a tripod. This too comes in handy

I think I paid about $40 or $50 about 1.5 years ago. It's well worth the price giving you the utmost flexibility. I also picked up a macro rail from Adorama (house brand) which I mount on a tripod. This too comes in handy

one thing to keep in mind with the mt-24ex is that you need to get the flash heads as close to the subject as possible. this will actually give a more diffused/less harsh light...i know, you'd possibly think it'd be the reverse but not so. by being closer it effectively increases the size of the light source in relation to the small shiny bug. same principle as getting a more natural looking portrait shot by using a larger flash umbrella or softbox.

one thing to keep in mind with the mt-24ex is that you need to get the flash heads as close to the subject as possible. this will actually give a more diffused/less harsh light...i know, you'd possibly think it'd be the reverse but not so. by being closer it effectively increases the size of the light source in relation to the small shiny bug. same principle as getting a more natural looking portrait shot by using a larger flash umbrella or softbox.

LastCoyote - you are right especially your note on the light source. well stated.